Minor correction (proving that I shouldn't post to these subjects in a hurry while working on other things):
> Getting back to what I was groggily trying to say last night: My sense > is that OSI's approval of CPAL back in '07 was motivated in part by a > perception that a modest badgeware requirement was one arguably > reasonable method for giving reciprocal licensing enforcement power in > ASP/SaaS deployment, and that Socialtext's CPAL proposal wasn't so > extreme in its requirements as to preemptively kill third-party > commercial competition the way badgeware licensing usually does (the OSD > #3 concern I cited). ^^ Intended reference was OSD #6 (discrimination against fields of endeavour). Creative steps to cripple commercial reuse rights for others are a recurring theme, I notice. _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
